BHAIYA LAL Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The circumstances under which this second appeal has come to be filed in this Court be noticed.

(2.) The revenue record indicates that one Maya Bai, was the bhumiswami. Her name is mentioned in column No. 8 in Exhibit D/3. Proceedings were initiated under the Madhya Pradesh Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Land was declared surplus. These proceedings were challenged in the Civil Court. The plea taken was that the plaintiff/appellants were members of joint Hindu family. The precise plea taken was that the husband of Maya Bai, was uncle (Tau) of the plaintiffs. It was also pleaded that there was partition between the family and on account of that partition, they had become bhumiswamies. It was further pleaded that they were not aware of the proceedings initiated under the Act referred to above, and therefore, any declaration made declaring the land in the hands of Maya Bai as surplus is bad.

(3.) The Court below has recorded the following findings :(i) that, the suit has been filed after the period of limitation; and(ii) that, Maya Bai was the owner and the plea set up regarding partition has not been proved.After recording the aforementioned findings, the suit was dismissed, by the trial Court. An appeal was preferred. The appeal was also dismissed.